& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

A Matter of Political Will
Two politicians best known for their efforts to maintain cross-floor harmony in the Jatiya Sangsad, Deputy Leader of the House Dr AQ M Badruddoza Chowdhury and Deputy Leader oi the Opposition Abdus Samad Azad, have spoken in unison again. The topic this time, at a seminar on Saturday, was the crucial issue of political violence and general lawlessness popularly known as 'terrorism’ that Is now gripping the country,.
The words spoken by them were reassuring because they showed both the major parties were under no illusion about the kind of danger now facing the nation. Their words also went a long way to suggest that people who had consistently claimed that terrorism, tts existence as well as its elimination, was a matter of political will, had been right all along. Another well-established truth, that political interference was to blame in large parts for the failure of the police to enforce the law. was also admitted by the two leaders.
There have been plenty of talk tn recent weeks about forming anti-terrorist committees in city neighbourhoods; of strengthening the administration; and of passing new. tougher laws to deal with the problem. The flaw in these approaches is that, first, the committees would probably be dominated by the same people who usually turn a blind eye to existence of terrorists among their own ranks; second, the administration is powerful enough as it is. but not functioning to Its optimum capability due to political Interference and corruption; and third, tne law cannot make an lota of difference unless it is applied fairly and firmly. which takes us back to where we started.
Both Chowdhury and Azad spoke of cooperation and dialogue at the seminar. The question now is. are they, or rather their parties, prepared to commit themselves to do the things that would make their words more than lust words ? Do they have the courage to sit tightly and watch silently as the police pick up.their cadres and charge them with crimes that can be proven? Most importantly. do they have the political will to give up. tn principle as well as in practice, the maintenance and use of armed cadres?
The two leaders have reached a consensus of words, but such words have been spoken by all and sundry in the past. What we need to see is a .consensus of deeds. Both the major parties need to-come to terms with each other's existence as rivals, but not as enemies. For the greater good of the nation as well as their parties, the BNP and AL ought to reach an agreement that neither will harbour terrorists within their ranks, and that any individual leader found to maintain his own cadre force would be expelled without so much as a warning. Once these two parties have truly cleaned up their acts, the task of dealing with other organisations, such the Jamaat-e-Islaml and its right-wing, fundamentalist allies, should pose no problem Tor the law enforcement agencies. In fact, with their commitment to a. violence-free democracy reiterated through a binding agreement. the activists of BMP. AL and other democratic forces can be expected to un\e to foil any attempt to threaten the Independence and freedom of the nation by neo-fascist and fundamentalist forces lurking behind the smokescreen of the present . crisis. The people of this country, by casting 70 per cent of their votes for the 'sheaf of paddy' and boat' in the last general elections, nave clearly shown their faith in these two parties to lead the nation towards democracy and prosperity. Now the AL and BNP have to repay that trust. But government leaders should understand that It is they who have to take the initiative. The BNP should acknowledge that unless the party in power begins the process of disarmament, the opposition never will. The opposition is always the weaker party in the equation because it does not control the police or para-military forces, and •in a system where the administration and police are under constant political pressure, the opposition is always at a disadvantage. Therefore, the display of genuine good faith ought to come first from the party in power, and only then can we expect to see some results.